Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: brewster Date: Dec 7, 2003 12:48am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: End audio-format trading > have mp3s too

A theory may be emerging on a way through this in the short term:
* pick a period of time for a test, say 2004
* respect individual tapers and uploaders who say "no audio versions" for particular shows
* after a time to let this all settle, convert other shows to 192Kb/sec MP3's
* see if it increases our user population significantly.
* strongly encourage lossless formats for uploads (education)
* openly discuss the evaluation of this system about this time next year.


You may ask-- why a test period of a year? well we are an archive and we think long term. Our culture makes us hesitant about taking things out of archives (images of burning come to mind), and restrictions that last forever. Forever is a long time.

In this pass, should we do high-resolution ogg's as well to try to push open standards?

What do you think?

-brewster


This post was modified by brewster on 2003-12-07 08:47:36

This post was modified by brewster on 2003-12-07 08:48:24

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Dec 7, 2003 10:20pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Proposed LMA model

In this pass, should we do high-resolution ogg's as well to try to push open standards?

Sure, the people of Slashdot would cheer for instance. :)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: niuphan Date: Dec 8, 2003 1:03am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Proposed LMA model

With regards to this whole trial period of hosting lossy file formats...(or hosting lossy formats AT ALL)

I know there are several reasons people want MP3's hosted, but mostly it comes down to they either do not have enough bandwidth, or they don't have the patience to WAIT.

With that in mind, lets say the archive decides to permanently host MP3's (after the year trial). What about 3 or 5 or 10 years from now when bandwidth is no longer an issue? As you probably have noticed, over time bandwidth has gotten cheaper and faster. Before cable/DSL became affordable or even available we all used modems. Now the cost of a dial up ISP is virtually the same as cable/DSL.

Modems will be extinct (believe it or not), people will be forced into high speed connections. Eventually there will be enough bandwidth to the point where we can stream SHN/FLAC.

When bandwidth is no longer an issue in this world, all we will have is an archive half full of degraded audio recordings. (and no one downloading them)

If I'm not mistaken, didn't the archive just quadruple their bandwidth? (I'm sure it won't be the last time). A show can be downloaded in an hour or two! Lets look in to the future and consider the long term ramifications of hosting lossy formats on the archive.

Thoughts?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Dec 8, 2003 1:48am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Proposed LMA model

Thoughts?

How about a discussion and evaluation after 1 year? ;)

This post was modified by hamilton on 2003-12-08 09:48:21

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thoman8r Date: Dec 8, 2003 3:30am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Proposed LMA model

How about a discussion and evaluation after 1 year? ;)

Because by then the damage is done.

I agree 100% with what niuphan said and I'd just like to add a few more points:

1.) Not only will bandwidth become cheaper and more prevalent but it's very likely that advances in compression algorithms will severely decrease the size of lossless audio files.

2.) Increased popularity in 24-bit audio will make the disparity between lossless and lossy audio even greater.

Dave

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: brewster Date: Dec 8, 2003 1:23pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Proposed LMA model

It is interesting to me that already there are 3 approaches:
* uniform access-oriented formats
* some-and-some based on the wishes of tapers
* only taper-oriented formats

The access formats are more accessible both because they are smaller and streamable, but because they are more widely supported without plug-ins or downloads.

Therefore at one year the "some and some" compromise approach could stay where it is, or go full access, or go full trade-oriented based on how the technology and culture shifts.

An experimental some-and-some period seems to be as close to middle of the road we have.

-brewster

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Erich Date: Dec 7, 2003 6:48pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: End audio-format trading > have mp3s too

Ive given it some thought, and, I cant agree with this method.

My other two posts illustrate how Im very interested in the long term education of the masses in regard to lossless. But, as I stated there, I just cant accept any method of action that will impose a heiarchy in the trading circles or impose a limit to a listener's right to choose. I mean, what % of people that just want an audio show they can get in the mail are going to be left out if tapers started appending their txt files with that disclaimer?

Then we go into the whole sociological aspect of it. Youve seen how the tapers get when you even hint at MP3s. Do you want that to start happening with audio? Going back to the DMB community example, people there are programmed to attack when others ask for MP3s. think of how it would be if people were all of a sudden told "no audio", and compound that with the idea that you want MP3s to be reintroduced as acceptible media. Im not saying people wont get used to it if that was the case, but im saying that its not conducive to a functional trading community.

And thats all just hypotheticals, too. I highly doubt people are going to induce a switch this big. I think anything of the sort needs to be a natural progression, much like how people are slowly switching to FLAC but not imeadiatly (incidently enough, the DMB community has gotten very little if any shows in FLAC).

I think the most idealistic of situations would be what phishlive.com offers, where youre given the choice of what to download, the documentation to educate you on what's what and how it works, and the lack of third party interference, ie txt disclaimers.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: nmculbreth Date: Dec 7, 2003 10:21pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: End audio-format trading > have mp3s too

i can't speak for others but i haven't moved to flac because it isn't supported by all operating systems (if memory serves correct it won't work in os 9). i use flac for 24 bit, but i haven't seem a good enough reason to switch for 16 bit.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Dec 7, 2003 9:47pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Proposed LMA model

* respect individual tapers and uploaders who say "no audio versions" for particular shows

Brewster, was that a typo for "no lossy versions"? From what I see in Erich's followup, this might need some clarification.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: nmculbreth Date: Dec 7, 2003 10:19pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Proposed LMA model

would this request still be honored after the one year trial period?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: brewster Date: Dec 8, 2003 12:08am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Proposed LMA model

I was following Diana's suggestion of:
"Do Not Encode to Audio Format for Trading"
from this post:
http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=10595

As I understand it, it is the ability to confirm that it is correct that is the key-- thus the centralized checksum on a lossless or losslessly compressed file.

-brewster

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Dec 8, 2003 1:07am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Proposed LMA model needs refinement

Hmm, but the no-audio-format idea is something that can only pertain to trading practices, which would be in effect outside the bounds of the LMA, in the relevant trading pool(s) themselves.

If there's a no-audio-trading statement on something, it can't bear on the LMA holdings, because we're not mailing out audio discs to folks over here. :)

Indeed, I'm suggesting file stampers shift their demand from no-mp3 to no-audio, because it forces a stronger fix over at the level where the perceived problem is instead (the trading pool), where quality-degrading audio discs *are* handed around right now.

At the same time, the LMA is taken out of the equation. The newer type of filestamp (for those who do want to stamp files) gives a benefit to the larger world beyond the trading pool- the LMA is freed up to bring more choices to non-traders.


This post was modified by hamilton on 2003-12-08 09:07:16